How slanted is media coverage for the gay agenda? Enough
that one show’s decision to include a proponent of reparative therapy in a
segment on the subject of reparative therapy provoked backlash from the gay
community.

The Dr. Oz Show aired
a segment on November 28 featuring a debate over the relative merits of
reparative therapy. Among the debaters was Julie Hamilton, a representative of NARTH (The National Association for the Research
and Therapy of Homosexuality), a group whose mission statement says that it “is a professional, scientific organization that offers hope
to those who struggle with unwanted homosexuality.”

But Dr Oz’s decision to including a representative of the
dreaded NARTH was enough to draw the ire of gay activists. The Huffington
Post groused: “A controversial
"Dr. Oz Show" episode has sparked the ire of the nation's most
high-profile lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) advocacy groups for
promoting the "dangerous and harmful practices" of reparative
therapy.”

The Huffington
Post also reported that Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG)
complained
in an e-mail statement: "Although the show also featured guests who
condemned the idea and practice of 'reparative therapy,' Dr. Oz himself never
weighed in, and the audience was misled to believe that there are actual
experts on both sides of this issue."

On his blog, Dr.
Oz explained
his reasoning for daring to include a NARTH representative on his show on
the topic of reparative therapy: “I felt that we needed to include all parties
who have considered reparative therapy to hear the stories of people who have
tried these treatments. Although some viewers may disagree with this tactic, if
we want to reach everyone who might benefit from understanding the risks of
this therapy, you have to present multiple perspectives.”

Dr. Oz also noted
in his post that he sided with the gay community on the issue of reparative
therapy: “After listening to both sides of the issue and after reviewing the
available medical data, I agree with the established medical consensus. I have
not found enough published data supporting positive results with gay reparative
therapy, and I have concerns about the potentially dangerous effects when the
therapy fails, especially when minors are forced into treatments.”

But even
agreement did not satisfy gay activists. In a joint
statement appearing on GLAAD’s website, GLSEN Executive Director Eliza
Baird protested: GLSEN would not have participated in The Dr. Oz Show had we
known that NARTH would be represented. The Dr. Oz Show provided a platform to a
fringe organization promoting dangerous and harmful practices that every major
health, mental health and education organization has consistently repudiated as
harmful to youth.”

The only
acceptable opinions on gay issues appear to be those of the gay community – as GLAAD
director Herndon Graddick wrote: “The issue is not one that can be
discussed as though both sides are equally valid.” Most of the media has
fallen into lockstep with this view that the only acceptable side is the
gay side. Those like Dr. Oz who dare to include contrary views are attacked for
allowing any view contrary to the gay agenda.

Federal employees and military personnel can donate to the Media Research Center through the Combined Federal Campaign or CFC. To donate to the MRC, use CFC #12489. Visit the CFC website for more information about giving opportunities in your workplace.